for those who want to be servants in the church

1Tim 3:8  The same goes for those who want to be servants in the church: serious, not deceitful, not too free with the bottle, not in it for what they can get out of it. 
1Tim 3:9  They must be reverent before the mystery of the faith, not using their position to try to run things. 
1Tim3:10  Let them prove themselves first. If they show they can do it, take them on. 
1Tim 3:11  No exceptions are to be made for women--same qualifications: serious, dependable, not sharp-tongued, not overfond of wine. 
1Tim 3:12  Servants in the church are to be committed to their spouses, attentive to their own children, and diligent in looking after their own affairs. 
1Tim 3:13  Those who do this servant work will come to be highly respected, a real credit to this Jesus-faith. 

1 Timothy 3:8

Likewise must the deacons - On the meaning of the word “deacons,” see the notes on Phi_1:1. On their appointment, see the notes, Act_6:1. The word here evidently denotes those who had charge of the temporal affairs of the church, the poor, etc. No qualifications are mentioned, implying that they were to be preachers of the gospel. In most respects, except in regard to preaching, their qualifications were to be the same as those of the “bishops.”

Be grave - Serious, sober-minded men. In Act_6:3, it is said that they should be men “of honest report.” On the meaning of the word “grave,” see the notes on 1Ti_3:4. They should be men who by their serious deportment will inspire respect.

Not double-tongued - The word here used δίλογος  dilogos - does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament. It means, properly, uttering the same thing twice (from δίς  dis and λέγω  legō), and then deceitful, or speaking one thing and meaning another. They should be men who can be relied on for the exact truth of what they say, and for the exact fulfillment of their promises.

Not given to much wine - see 1Ti_3:3. The word “much” is added here to what is said 1Ti_3:2 of the qualification of a bishop. It is not affirmed that it would be proper for the deacon, anymore than the bishop, to indulge in the use of wine in small quantities, but it “is” affirmed that a man who is much given to the use of wine ought not, on any consideration, to be a deacon. It may be remarked here, that this qualification was everywhere regarded as necessary for a minister of religion. Even the pagan priests, on entering a temple, did not drink wine. “Bloomfield.” The use of wine, and of strong drinks of all kinds, was absolutely prohibited to the Jewish ministers of every rank when they were about to engage in the service of God; Lev_10:9. Why should it then be anymore proper for a Christian minister to drink wine than for a Jewish or a pagan priest? Shall a minister of the gospel be less holy than they? Shall he have a feebler sense of the purity of his vocation? Shall he be less careful lest he expose himself to the possibility of conducting the services of religion in an irreverent and silly manner? Shall he venture to approach the altar of God under the influence of intoxicating drinks, when a sense of propriety restrained the pagan priest, and a solemn statue of Yahweh restrained the Jewish priest from doing it?

Not greedy of filthy lucre - notes, 1Ti_3:3. The special reason why this qualification was important in the deacon was, that he would be entrusted with the funds of the church, and might be tempted to appropriate them to his own use instead of the charitable purposes for which they were designed; see this illustrated in the case of Judas, John_12:6.